NationStates Jolt Archive

I was looking on NSWiki (when it would actually work for me ... for some reason it has been buggy as of late) at other players River entries.

I then started doing some research on real rivers on Wikipedia. Wiki doesn't really have a standardized guideline for content in the actual entries, but it does have a nice river info box.

I don't know how to program info boxes in NSWiki, but I was thinking it would be cool to have one for NS Rivers.

Here is what Wiki uses for River Info Boxes:

1. Picture
2. Origin
3. Mouth
4. Basin Countries
5. Length
6. Source Elevation
7. Avg. Discharge
8. Watershed Area


I'd like to propose that for NationStates that we adopt a NSWiki info box, with some of the following:

1. Picture
2. Origin (including Planet if part of an extraterrestrial environment)
3. Mouth
4. Basin Countries
5. Length <optional>
6. Source Elevation <optional>
7. Avg. Discharge <optional>
8. Watershed Area <optional>

Basically, standardizing the first 4 options might be nice for NSWiki and then creating a River Category.


As for content, we could do something like this (with sections being left blank when unknown):

1. Geography / Course
1.1 Headwaters
1.2 Tributaries / Canals
1.3 Confluence / Destination
2. Physical Characteristics
2.2 Hydrology / Runoff
2.3 Geology
2.4 Water Quality
3. Economics
3.1 Navigation
3.2 Fishing
3.3 Water Supply (Ag / Urban)
3.4 Power Supply
3.5 Tourism
4 Historical Significance
4.1 Cultural History
4.2 Military History

(Actually this is an idea I'd like to propose Wiki adopt as well.)

Anyways, I think this nicely divides rivers up into two sections with information about the river itself and then two more sections about how it is and has been used. If this sounds like too much, I'm preparing to start Wikifying Mikitivity's rivers, and in a month should have an example for my "Risden" River, which will share many of the characteristics of the Rhine and Rhone Rivers.


The last question I wanted to through out is a naming convention. In Wiki, some rivers are simply their name, "Danube", while others include the word "river" such as in the case of the "Rhone River". For NSWiki, I think it would be more appropriate to name all rivers including "river", so the entry I would create for my river would be "Risden River". We can use redirects for entries where other names are used for the river as it crosses international borders, as the Risden does (it passes through German and French speaking provinces).

I don't want to create my NSWiki stub until I've had some feedback on the naming convention folks think we should adopt. The primary reason I feel "Risden River" is better than "Risden" is it is very likely that there would be a city called "Risden" somewhere as well, such as "Sacramento" (my RL home) and "Sacramento River".

This should probably be discussed on the Wiki. Most Wikis have a page dealing with 'Established Standards'. The NSWiki is not an official organ of NS, thus discussing proposed rule changes here is just as irrelevent as discussing standards changes for any other Wiki here.

This should probably be discussed on the Wiki. Most Wikis have a page dealing with 'Established Standards'. The NSWiki is not an official organ of NS, thus discussing proposed rule changes here is just as irrelevent as discussing standards changes for any other Wiki here.

I'm not talking to "Wiki"-only people here, but given that the vast majority of NSWiki users *also* look to NationStates, I wanted to bring an idea for standardization of "NSWiki" up in an appropriate forum. Currently there are no NSWiki bulletin boards, and the NSWiki *is* a tool used by NationStates players to further their gameplay experiences ... hence I *still* believe this is an appropriate place to pose the question.

Had I posted on any of the other Jolt forums, I might agree with you ... but this forum really is here to give players a chance to talk about elements of their gameplay *and* NSWiki is one of the tools to do that.

Had I been promoting my region by recuriting or attempting to generate interest in a regional forum, which aren't official to NS, the moderation team has always directed posts here. Frankly I don't see how anybody could attempt to suggest this is as irrelevant as other Wikis.

edit: from the stickied thread (Tactical Grace)


Issues relating to nation and region configurations / customisable fields and ownership, such as:
Discussion of witty or apt comments for mottos and other customisable fields.
Showing off / discussing parody nations.
Descriptions / discussion of puppets and about others' puppets.
Description of non-RP-related national characteristics.
Flag Services.
Map Services.

Why is offering to discuss region configurations or maps and flags on-topic, but wanting to discuss a global encyclopedia (wiki-styled tool) wrong???



That said, I've started a stub on my gameplaye river: Risden River on the NSWiki. I'll slowly be adding to it, and would invite constructive feedback.

http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Risden_River

This should probably be discussed on the Wiki. Most Wikis have a page dealing with 'Established Standards'. The NSWiki is not an official organ of NS, thus discussing proposed rule changes here is just as irrelevent as discussing standards changes for any other Wiki here.

Conventionally, it could really be discussed on any medium. Here, there, IRC, MSN. As long as we're encouraging discussion, I'm happy. Really, though, Hack, if you're that concerned about it, we'll just host it on NSwiki. However, we do not have an "established standards" page. I don't know where you got that, though we do piggyback (per se) Wikipedia for most of our conventions, excluding table coding.